ESL General English Grammar Questions

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

Anonymous — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:18:15 GMT

What you said is right, for should means possibility and obligation and ought means only obligation.
Therefore he shouldn't have left for America means â It is possible that he hasn't left for America andâ¡He was not obliged to leave for America, but he did. On the other hand, he oughtn't have left for America only means â¡He was not obliged to leave for America, but he did.

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

Avangi — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:54:30 GMT

All of the jobs you left for me to do have been done.

These hamburgers have been done for half an hour. They're well-done!

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

Anonymous — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:15:25 GMT

Hi

does anyone can tell me how to use "have been done"

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

Marius Hancu — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 12:29:25 GMT

For both verbs, both the meanings mentioned above are possible. Only based on context can one decide.

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

Viceidol — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:16:45 GMT

Thank you for your answers! And I have to thank Jim for his detailed analysis of the usage of "should". That really helps me a lot.

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

CalifJim — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 05:28:45 GMT

The forms with ought are likewise divided into ought-exp and ought-adv.

Though ought-exp is theoretically possible, it is rarely used. So almost all uses of ought are uses of the ought of advice (advisability), i.e., ought-adv.

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

CalifJim — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 05:01:13 GMT

Here are my opinions. Two different should's are possible:

the should of expectation should-exp

the should of advice should-adv

should-adv is much more common than should-exp.

should-exp expresses an evaluation of the situation with regard to what is possible, probable, plausible, or necessary logically.

should-adv expresses an evaluation of the situation with regard to the propriety of the behavior of the people involved.

Because of the different ways a situation can be viewed, depending on the actual content of the sentence, those situations containing more 'agency' (subjects of the sentence referring to people, not things) are more likely to have a reading of should as should-adv. In fact, the interpretation of should as should-exp can only come through in a convincing way when the sentence is interpreted in a way that leaves questions of agency aside.

She should-exp be at John's. = I expect that she is at John's. (giving an opinion about her location only)

She should-adv be at John's. = It is advisable for her to be at John's. (giving an opinion about her duty, her behavior)

She shouldn't-exp be at John's. = ???I expect that she is not at John's. (Rare, I suspect.)

She shouldn't-adv be at John's = It is not advisable for her to be at John's.

She should-exp have been at John's. = ???I expect that she was at John's. (Rare, I suspect.)

She should-adv have been at John's. = It was advisable for her to be at John's (although she was not there). = She was supposed to be at John's (although she was not there).

She shouldn't-exp have been at John's. = ???I expect that she was not at John's. (Rare, I suspect.)

She shouldn't-adv have been at John's. = It was not advisable for her to be at John's (although she was there). = She was not supposed to be at John's (although she was there).

Note that as the negative and the auxiliary have are added, it becomes increasingly difficult to assign the meaning should-exp to the should in the sentence.

__________

She should-adv leave for America. = It is advisable for her to leave for America.

She shouldn't-adv leave for America. = It is not advisable for her to leave for America.

She should-adv have left for America. = It was advisable for her to leave for America, though she failed to do so.

She shoudn't-adv have left for America. = It was not advisable for her to leave for America, though she did anyway.

________

There is so much 'agency' in the idea of someone leaving for America that it is very difficult to see how these sentences could be construed as containing should-exp. Changes must be made to the sentences in order to cue the reader to the possibility of a reading with should-exp. Note the use of the progressive tense to help cue the reader toward should-exp.

She should-exp be leaving for America soon. = I expect that she will leave for America soon.

She shouldn't-exp be leaving for America for some time. = I don't expect her to leave for America for some time.

She should-exp have left for America by now. = I expect she has already left for America (by now).

She shoudn't-exp have left for America yet. = ???I don't expect that she has left for America yet.

The last two might more easily have been stated with will or would, the negative probably being less used than the affirmative:

She will/would probably have left for America by now. = I expect she has already left for America (by now).

She won't/wouldn't have left for America yet. = I don't expect that she has left for America yet.

_________

This task should only take three minutes to do. (should-exp because there is no agency.)

He's only going to mail a letter. He shouldn't be long. (should-exp because there is no agency when we merely estimate the time an action will take. There is nothing here to suggest that we would be evaluating the propriety, appropriateness, or correctness of his behavior.)

________

I hope this helps, even though it is a bit complex.

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

Mister Micawber — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 04:40:18 GMT

.
I agree, but another opinion might be helpful, since mine was the response also in the linked thread.

Re: Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

Avangi — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 04:39:54 GMT

You have the right idea. These are two different senses of "shouldn't." I'd reword your (2): It's likely that he hasn't left for America yet.

I may be mistaken, but I'd allow the same two interpretations for your "oughtn't to" sentence.

Looking at Mr. M.'s post which you referenced, I'll stand with what I've said. I think the difference between s. and o. in the second intrerpretation would be a difference in the reason why it's likely she hasn't left yet. With s. the reason may be unspecified while with o. she is "obliged", or has some obligation to remain for the present time. (With s. she may have had an attack of appendicitis.)

Possible meaning of "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"?

Viceidol — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 02:03:43 GMT

Hi, I knew that "shouldn't do" and "ought not to" doesn't completely mean the same thing from http://www.englishforums.com/English/PossibleMeaningShouldnt/zxkzw/post.htm.

But how about "oughtn't (to) have done" and "shouldn't have done"? Like:

He shouldn't have left for America. (It could probably mean (1) He wasn't supposed to leave for America, but he did. or (2) It is possible that he hadn't left for America yet. )

He oughtn't (to) have left for America. (It could only mean "He wasn't supposed to left for America, but he did." )

Am I right? Please give me your opinion, thank you!